Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76:75-119 (2002)
Abstract[Graeme Forbes] In I, I summarize the semantics for the relational/notional distinction for intensional transitives developed in Forbes. In II-V I pursue issues about logical consequence which were either unsatisfactorily dealt with in that paper or, more often, not raised at all. I argue that weakening inferences, such as 'Perseus seeks a mortal gorgon, therefore Perseus seeks a gorgon', are valid, but that disjunction inferences, such as 'Perseus seeks a mortal gorgon, therefore Perseus seeks a mortal gorgon or an immortal gorgon', are invalid. Since 'a gorgon' and 'a mortal gorgon or an immortal gorgon' are extensionally and intensionally the same quantifier, it is not completely trivial to arrange the semantics of intensional transitives so that this classification of the inferences is obtained. ; the latter will be incorporated into a forthcoming monograph, Attitude Problems.) /// [Jennifer Saul] This paper discusses the question of which verbs are intensional transitives. In particular, I ask which verbs Forbes should take to be intensional transitives. I argue that it is very difficult to arrive at a clear and plausible understanding of what an intensional transitive is-making it difficult to answer these questions. I end by briefly raising some questions about the usefulness of the category of intensional transitives.
Similar books and articles
Intensionality: What Are Intensional Transitives?Jennifer M. Saul - 2002 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):101–119.
Intensional Verbs and Quantifiers.Friederike Moltmann - 1997 - Natural Language Semantics 5 (1):1-52.
II—Jennifer Saul: What Are Intensional Transitives?Jennifer M. Saul - 2002 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):101-119.
Intensional Verbs and Their Intentional Objects.Friederike Moltmann - 2008 - Natural Language Semantics 16 (3):239-270.
Attitude Problems: An Essay on Linguistic Intensionality.Graeme Forbes - 2006 - Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
The Gorgon Wilk Medusa. Solving the Mystery of the Gorgon. Pp. X + 277, Figs, Ills. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Paper, £13 . ISBN: 978-0-19-534131-7. [REVIEW]E. Anne Mackay - 2011 - The Classical Review 61 (1):184-186.
Perseus and the Gorgon: Pindar Pythian 12.9-12 Reconsidered.Charles Segal - 1995 - American Journal of Philology 116 (1):7-17.
Representing Unicorns: How to Think About Intensionality.Mark Sainsbury - 2012 - In G. Currie, P. Kotatko & M. Pokorny (eds.), Mimesis: Metaphysics, Cognition, Pragmatics. College Publications.
Sainsbury on Thinking About Fictional Things.Anthony Everett - 2014 - Acta Analytica 29 (2):181-194.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Implications of Intensional Perceptual Ascriptions for Relationalism, Disjunctivism, and Representationalism About Perceptual Experience.David Bourget - 2019 - Erkenntnis 84 (2):381-408.
Vendler’s Puzzle About Imagination.Justin D’Ambrosio & Daniel Stoljar - 2021 - Synthese 199 (5-6):12923-12944.
References found in this work
No references found.